(a) The number of points indicated in the Annex 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 19 are in order.

The real estate of this case is owned by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) 1,224/5,359, the Selection Party E, 1,819/5,359, 662/5, 359, 662/5, 359, 662/5, 359, 359, and 992/5, 359, and Defendant C did not have an agreement prohibiting division of the real estate of this case, and there was no agreement regarding the method of division of the real estate of this case until the date of closing the argument of this case.

【Legal basis for recognition” Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the above fact-finding of the claim for partition of co-owned property of this case can be claimed against the Defendants, who are co-owners of the real estate of this case, as co-owners, the appointed parties, E, and F, pursuant to Article 269(1) of the Civil Act.

The partition of co-owned property by the method of partition is in principle divided in kind. However, considering all the circumstances, such as the location, size, present status, Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed Party, the time when the parties own co-ownership share, the progress of the lawsuit in this case (the Defendant did not present any opinion on the division) and the progress of the lawsuit in this case, it is reasonable to divide the co-owned property in kind as prescribed in paragraph (1) of the same Article, taking into account all the circumstances such as the location and size of the real property in this case, the status, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appellant, the time when

In conclusion, the real estate of this case shall be divided as ordered.